Talk:EMV/Archives/2015

Liability Shift #2
I've been a merchant for over 30 years, and I'm perpetually annoyed that I am always liable for the fraud. The articles idea of a "Liability Shift to the merchant" makes no sense - since that's *already* the case? 120.151.160.158 (talk) 21:10, 28 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Interesting, I've worked in financial institutions for 30 years and we've always incurred the expense for fraud. If there is a reference different from those cited in the article, that would be helpful. Bahooka (talk) 21:13, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Merge Chip and PIN and Chip and Signature into EMV
"Chip and signature" and "chip and PIN" are used pretty much exclusively as generic terms for two types of EMV cards which share the vast majority of their technical and financial underpinnings and which are distinguished only by the physical cardholder verification methods they prioritize. For this reason, both topics would be better discussed as a part of this article.

The chip and PIN article does identify the term as a United Kingdom–specific brand name. However, this is at most a very niche use; just search for it if you don't believe me.—Neil P. Quinn (talk) 07:21, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Emphasis on contactless technology
Aside from the article needing clean-up to accommodate the merger of Chip-and-signature and Chip-and-PIN, we need to put more emphasis on aspect of EMV with regards to contactless payments and how new developments have affected their use, as that is equally considered part of the EMV standard, whose future may be put at risk with the advances we are seeing in mobile payments. &#60;&#60;&#60; SOME GADGET GEEK &#62;&#62;&#62; (talk) 00:52, 29 June 2015 (UTC)